> the HP ScanJet IIc has an optical resolution of 400 dpi. All other values
> are interpolated. The scanner can do an interpolation for 12 to 1600
> dpi.
This doesn't match up very well with my actual experience of using the
scanner. I suppose it's possible (but unlikely) that it is broken...
Here are some example results (happily scanned with the new XSane release)
they are all for _exactly the same physical scan area_
400 dpi color scan --> 364 x 374 image
600 dpi color scan --> 546 x 560 image
800 dpi color scan --> 728 x 747 image
900 dpi color scan --> 720 x 740 image (!)
1600 dpi color scan --> 728 x 747 image (!)
I don't particularly care whether the scanner has an optical resolution of
400 dpi, 800 dpi or even 1600 dpi for that matter. But I do know that the
SANE backend never gives me more 728 x 747 (which is 800 dpi exactly)
no matter how high a resolution I choose from scanimage or XSane.
I've just tested in Windows, and there I can do a 1600dpi scan but as you
say, this is interpolated data, and by 1600dpi it's becoming rather too
obvious that most of the data is a fairy tale (15 made up pixels for each
one read by hardware I guess).
So, I suppose I'd like (1) An HP backend fix if applicable, and (2) Some
future SANE standard to include Optical Resolution where known, so that I
don't waste my SCSI bandwidth on interpolated data :)
If this problem can't be diagnosed remotely, I'll look at it on Sunday.
Nick.
-- Source code, list archive, and docs: http://www.mostang.com/sane/ To unsubscribe: echo unsubscribe sane-devel | mail majordomo@mostang.com